from the you-can't-make-this-up dept

Every time you think the Righthaven farce must be over -- or, at the very least, couldn't get any stranger -- something new pops up. The latest is that Righthaven CEO Steve Gibson (who, as we've mentioned, has already moved on to a new lawyer job, while still technically being CEO of Righthaven) has submitted a bizarre filing with the court that basically plays the "me? I've got nothing to do with any of this!" card in trying to avoid having to provide some key documents in one of the many cases where Righthaven owes attorneys' fees for its bogus lawsuits.

For a rather complete takedown of Gibson's filing and why it may create significant legal problems for Gibson later, I recommend Patrick Anderson's vicious dissection of the filing. Gibson, a lawyer now working for a big law firm, claims that he's a "non-party" in this lawsuit, despite being the CEO and key officer in the company in question. He insists that, despite being a lawyer, as the CEO he cannot act as a lawyer for the firm. However, as Anderson notes, in the early days, Gibson did exactly that and signed various filings for Righthaven:

Elsewhere in the filing, Gibson basically says that Righthaven's own lawyer, Shawn Mangano, simply refuses to respond to his contact attempts, and he actually tells the court it should compel Mangano to appear. Yes, this is the CEO of a company telling the court that it can't contact its own lawyer and that the court should step in and force that lawyer to show up:

I have attempted by way of letter, telephone and electronic mail to contact Mangano in order to receive updates on the statuses of all cases to no avail. Mangano has been entirely uncommunicative. Mangano cannot complain of non-payment, as Righthaven made all required payments, until such time as Mangano became entirely uncommunicative.

As Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of Righthaven, I do not have any means to effect compliance with the Minute Order but stand prepared to assist within the province of the law and not in a manner that causes me to engage in personal efforts above and beyond that which the CEO of Righthaven is capable of doing with the limited resources currently available to Righthaven, assuming I receive notice of same.

Therefore, Gibson hereby respectfully requests this Court to order Mangano to appear before the Court and effect compliance with the Minute Order. Gibson further requests this Court order Mangano to reinvigorate Mangano’s representation of Righthaven until such time as this Court would find appropriate the withdrawal by Mangano.

Anderson, however, notes a bizarre contradiction within Gibson's own filing. He notes both that Gibson states that "Righthaven has no funds" to order a copy of the transcript which the court is demanding of him... but then also notes that Mangano shouldn't fear not getting paid for working for Righthaven because "one or more of Righthaven's parents" would likely "continue to make capital contributions." In other words, Gibson appears to both plead poverty in paying for a copy the court has ordered him to get and the fact that it has access to money to pay lawyers to get that same document in the same filing. Wow.

Anderson also mocks Gibson for later "apologizing" in the filing for not having access to specific case citation page numbers, noting that while this is a minor point, earlier in the filing Gibson admits that he is employed as a lawyer at a giant law firm, and is filing this particular court filing via his CM/ECF login (Case Management/Electronic Case Files), which he has because of his employment at that law firm. Anderson cuts through the crap and points out that Gibson must be hoping the judge is a complete moron:

So “convenience” allows Gibson to use his ECF account, but apparently does not allow him to use an actual law library to read the cases cited against him and respond with accurate page numbers.

Anderson, a patent attorney who often writes about how companies can use patents to make money, worries that Righthaven and Gibson's crazy antics will come back to haunt patent trolling firms:

When Gibson eventually defends himself in an argument over whether he should be protected by the corporate veil, his opponents will make sure each little infraction comes back to bite at his credibility. If Gibson loses, and becomes personally liable for actions of his LLC, that decision becomes reported and used as precedent in other cases. At minimum, that’s going to raise legal costs and uncertainty for LLC owners everywhere, particular in the IP arena because every patent monetization company is going to be compared to Righthaven, and even the owner of a patent who loses on a good faith argument of infringement or validity may end up having personal assets at least threatened as a result.

I assume that some folks around here don't think that's a particularly bad result. And even though I'm not a fan of Righthaven or patent trolling companies, I do think that we should be pretty careful about under what circumstances the corporate veil should be pierced (though I know many here disagree). To be honest, the more we see about the way Righthaven acted, I think there is growing evidence that it was abusing the corporate structure to do questionable things -- and thus, this might be a case where corporate veil piercing makes sense. As long as other trolling operations aren't doing that, then perhaps this won't be as big an issue.

from the a-study-in-incompetence dept

As you may recall, when the federal district court in Nevada granted Marc Randazza's request to turn Righthaven's assets over to a receiver, for the sake of using them to satisfy the court ordered attorneys' fees in the Hoehn case, the court also ordered -- pretty damn clearly -- that Righthaven's principles, Steve Gibson and Raisha "Drizzle" Y. Gibson, appear in court on January 5th. Already, we knew that Righthaven had failed -- as required by the court -- to produce certain documents a week prior to this hearing (for which Randazza has asked the court to declare Righthaven in contempt). You may notice that the date on the calendar is now January 6th.

It's one thing to ignore opposing counsel. It's another to ignore multiple direct court orders, including one to appear in court. But... neither Gibson showed up in court yesterday. Nor did Righthaven's main lawyer: Shawn Mangano. According to Randazza, the judge then called Mangano who claimed that he "thought it was tomorrow" (but did not explain the failure to deliver the required documents).

This is pretty amazing. We've had people in our comments repeatedly asking about the January 5th deadline. If a bunch of our commenters can keep the date straight, can't the lawyer for the company being dragged into court? As I said, Righthaven's ability to do exactly the wrong thing at nearly every opportunity is stunning. And every time we think we can't be surprised any more, something like this happens. This is the most amazing study in incompetence we've ever seen. This is a company that failed to properly secure the copyrights it was suing over, chose not to use the DMCA's takedown procedures, often targeted questionable cases of infringement, sued people over clear fair use situations, used a completely bogus demand for domain names in the lawsuits it filed, has been accused of theunauthorized practice of law in multiple states, failed to list Stephens Media as an interested party as required by Nevada law (for which it was sanctioned), failed to file many documents on time, missed deadlines for certain important filings, failed to pay attorneys' fees owed, lost cases due not just to the failure to secure copyright properly but also to missing deadlines, had an appeal thrown out for failing to follow proper procedure... and, has been sued by their own process server for failure to pay its bills. And now this (and I'm probably missing some stuff!).

The judge has set a new hearing date for Monday, January 9th at 9am. I can't imagine that the Gibsons and Mangano could possibly think they can get away with missing that one, too -- but if you had asked, I never would have believed most of the things that Righthaven has done so far would ever happen in real life.

from the good-luck-with-that dept

It appears that Righthaven's new legal strategy, after getting beaten down left and right by Marc Randazza, is to just stop responding to him or the court. Think of it as the "play dead" strategy. You may recall that last week, in the Hoehn case, Righthaven was ordered to turn over its own intellectual property to a receivership to settle the attorneys' fees owed to Randazza. While waiting for that to happen, there was a hearing (on Friday) in another case involving Righthaven and Randazza... and Righthaven's lawyer, Shawn Mangano, simply did not appear. On top of that, he has refused to respond to any contact from Randazza and the other lawyers in his firm:

Attorney Mangano has not replied to any of my faxed correspondence -- a manner of communication he had previously requested I use in lieu of e-mail and telephone communication -- since this Court's December 12 Order granting the receivership order.

Basically, it looks like Righthaven is trying out a different sort of response to the various cases involving Randazza: it's just ignoring them entirely. I can't see how that ends well.

In response, Randazza is now looking to go after Righthaven CEO Steve Gibson and his wife Raisha Y. Gibson, a/k/a "Drizzle." At this point, you have to get the feeling that the Righthaven crew has simply been so pummeled by Randazza that it's in a bit of shock. I wonder if Steve Gibson is still claiming that the courts know that Righthaven is "genuine" and is merely providing "guidance" to Righthaven competitors...